Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Demand Secretary of State John Kerry's Resignation

I signed...I hope you all do too.

Sen. Cruz: Sec. Kerry Should Offer President Obama His Resignation;

The President Should Accept It
Calls for resignation following Secretary Kerry’s remarks that
Israel could become an “apartheid state”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) today spoke on the Senate floor to call for U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s resignation following the secretary’s comments at the Trilateral Commission that Israel could become an “apartheid state” if his proposed two-state solution to the peace Israeli-Palestinian peace-process fails.

“There is no place for this word in the context of the State of Israel.  The term ‘apartheid’ means ‘apart’—different, isolated—the state of the victims of apartheid with which the Jews are all too familiar. The notion that Israel would go down that path, and so face the same condemnation that met South Africa, is unconscionable.  The United States should be aggressively asserting that Israel can never be made an apartheid nation while America exists, because America will be with Israel regardless of the status of any diplomatic process.

“The fact that Secretary Kerry sees nothing wrong with making such a statement on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day demonstrates a shocking lack of sensitivity to the incendiary and damaging nature of his rhetoric.  It is my belief that Secretary Kerry has thus proven himself unsuitable for his position and that before any further harm is done to our alliance with Israel, he should offer President Obama his resignation and the President should accept it.”  

Sen. Cruz was one of three U.S. Senators to vote against Secretary Kerry’s nomination, citing his belief that as Secretary of State, John Kerry would place what he considered to be the wishes of the international community above the national security interests of the United States.

Video of Sen. Cruz’s remarks may be viewed at:

The full text of Sen. Cruz’s prepared remarks is below:

Every member of this body has expressed our commitment for the United States to stand resolutely with our friend and ally the Nation of Israel.  Doing so is right, and it is overwhelmingly in the national security interests of the United States.

It was therefore with great sadness that I read this morning about the comments of Secretary of State John Kerry, who reportedly suggested at the Trilateral Commission that Israel could become an “apartheid state” if his proposed two-state solution to the peace Israeli-Palestinian peace-process fails. 

Secretary Kerry has long experience in foreign policy, and he should understand that words matter.  “Apartheid” is inextricably associated with one of the worst examples of state-sponsored discrimination in recent memory—the apartheid system in South Africa that was ultimately brought down by the heroic resistance of Nelson Mandela inside the country, supported by a concerted campaign of diplomatic and economic sanctions by the international community.

There is no place for this word in the context of the State of Israel.  The term “apartheid” means “apart”—different, isolated—the state of the victims of apartheid with which the Jews are all too familiar. The notion that Israel would go down that path, and so face the same condemnation that met South Africa, is unconscionable.  The United States should be aggressively asserting that Israel can never be made an apartheid nation while America exists, because America will be with Israel regardless of the status of any diplomatic process.

Fifteen months ago—almost to the day—John Kerry was confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 94-3.  Despite my preference for giving the President the cabinet members of his choice, I found I could not join the vast majority of my colleagues and support his nomination because I was convinced that as Secretary of State, John Kerry would place what he considered to be the wishes of the international community above the national security interests of the United States.  I fear with these most-recent ill-chosen remarks, Secretary Kerry has proven those concerns well founded.  Rather than focusing on our clear national security interest—which is continuing to guarantee Israel’s security through our unquestionable commitment to it—Secretary Kerry has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to countenance a world where Israel is made a pariah because it will not sacrifice its security to his diplomatic initiatives.  It is no wonder that Israel’s Defense Minister remarked in January that “The only thing that can save us is for John Kerry to win a Nobel Prize and leave us in peace.”

The fact that Secretary Kerry sees nothing wrong with making such a statement on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day demonstrates a shocking lack of sensitivity to the incendiary and damaging nature of his rhetoric.  Mr. President, it is my belief that Secretary Kerry has thus proven himself unsuitable for his position and that before any further harm is done to our alliance with Israel, he should offer President Obama his resignation and the President should accept it.  

Click on link to sign the petition:
New numbers show the GDP took a nose dive in the past quarter going from 2.5 percent to just 0.1 percent, prompting analysis that America could be headed for a double dip recession. More from the Wall Street Journal.
The U.S. economy slowed in the first quarter to one of the weakest paces of the five-year recovery as the frigid winter appeared to have curtailed business investment and weakness overseas hurt exports.

Gross domestic product, the broadest measure of goods and services produced across the economy, advanced at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 0.1% in the first quarter, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal had forecast growth at a 1.1% pace for the quarter.
High taxes, Obamacare and economic uncertainty are coming home to roost.

GOP: 'Smoking Gun' Benghazi Email Proves White House 'Cover-Up'
By Greg Richter and Todd Beamon

  / Newsmax

Republicans charged Tuesday that an email in which a White House official advises former U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to link the 2012 Benghazi attack to an anti-Muslim video confirms the linkage was fabricated to help President Barack Obama's re-election.

"This email is a smoking gun," Sen. Lindsey Graham told Newsmax. "It shows political operatives in the White House working to create a political narrative at odds with the facts.

"Their goal was not to tell the truth about what actually happened," Graham said Tuesday. "They did not want to provide the best information available.

"Instead, we were provided the most beneficial political story for President Obama."

New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte told "On the Record With Greta Van Susteren" on Fox News Channel: "We always said, 'Where did the video reference come from?' Now we know it came from the White House" and not the intelligence community.

Both Graham and Ayotte are members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. They have been among the many Republicans who have called for an independent investigation of the attacks on Sept. 11, 2012, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, including two former Navy SEALS.

Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, the panel's ranking GOP member, told Newsmax: "This was a cover-up, and these e-mails only continue to confirm my belief."

"The emails show that in the days after the attack in Benghazi, Libya, the White House was more focused on protecting President Obama than informing Americans about the terrorist attack that left Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead."

The email, dated Sept. 14, 2012, was among more than 100 pages of documents released by Judicial Watch on Tuesday. It shows White House Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes advising Rice, who now is Obama's national security adviser, to focus on the YouTube video as the cause of a spontaneous protest that led to the attack.

But previously released emails show senior defense officials told the administration on the night of the attack that it was terrorism linked to al-Qaida and that no protest had occurred.

Rhodes outlined several talking points for Rice, with the advice "to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."

The email was prepared for a Sept. 15 "prep call" with Rice that was to occur at 4 p.m., according to the document. The following day, five days after the attack, Rice appeared on five Sunday talk shows, each time linking the Libyan attacks to the anti-Muslim video.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton cited the same reason for the attacks, while Obama would not say whether it was terrorism until several days afterward.

Former CIA deputy director Mike Morell testified earlier this month that he had no idea where the story about a video protest came from when he saw Rice make the claim on television.

The other Americans killed in the attacks on the U.S. consulate and adjacent CIA annex were Sean Smith and two former Navy SEALs, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods.

Judicial Watch obtained the documents on April 18 via a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit it filed against the State Department last June, said President Tom Fitton. The group obtained 41 emails, many of which had portions redacted.

"Now we know the Obama White House's chief concern about the Benghazi attack was making sure that President Obama looked good," Fitton said.

"These documents undermine the Obama administration's narrative that it thought the Benghazi attack had something to do with protests or an Internet video," he said. "Given the explosive material in these documents, it is no surprise that we had to go to federal court to pry them loose from the Obama State Department."

Some of the top White House officials who received the Rhodes memo were White House Press Secretary Jay Carney; Deputy Press Secretary Joshua Earnest; then-White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer; then-White House Deputy Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri; then-National Security Council Director of Communications Erin Pelton; Special Assistant to the Press Secretary Howli Ledbetter; and then-White House Senior Adviser and political strategist David Plouffe.

In her interview with Van Susteren, Ayotte said the email made it clear that the focus of the "prep call" was to ensure that Obama, who was less than two months away from a tight re-election bid, looked like a strong leader rather than try to get out the facts on the attacks as they were known.

Further, since both Carney and Plouffe were among the email's recipients, it can be assumed they read it and were aware of the story that Rice was going to tell, Republicans said.

Also troubling, Ayotte said, was that in the email was a reference for Rice to make sure to mention that al-Qaida had been destroyed.

"That was nowhere in the talking points, and actually it's contradicted by what we know happened on that day," Ayotte told Van Susteren.

Meanwhile, Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for Sen. Ted Cruz, another member of the Armed Services Committee, told Newsmax that the email confirmed "how little we really know about what happened in Benghazi on Sept 11, 2012."

"This administration must be held accountable to telling the truth so that we can find closure, bring our attackers to justice, and prevent future attacks," Frazier said.

Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar told Newsmax: "Today we learn, from documents obtained by Judicial Watch, that the president's communications team intentionally fabricated a story about Benghazi in order to deceive the American public."

"The Obama administration made up a story out of whole cloth to deceive the American people and to try to make the president look good," he said.

Gosar is a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which also has been investigating the Benghazi attack.

"Whether lying about Obamacare, and now lying about Benghazi, this administration has no decency," Gosar said.

News Susan Rice Face The Nation
Published on April 29th, 2014 | by Editorial Staff

TRUTH REVEALED: Official Emails Show White House Cover Up Of Benghazi Attack

New information has been released on the Benghazi attack from emails obtained by Judicial Watch show that Obama Administration officials had emailed Ambassador Susan Rice before her Sunday talk show appearance to coach her to inform the public that the attack occurred as a spontaneous protest because on the controversial Internet video.  Susan Rice made this argument even though defense officials had informed administration officials the night of the attack that it was terrorism.  The emails call into question the timeline of events the White House has stood by and Congressional testimony by administration officials. ______________
Newly released emails on the Benghazi terror attack suggest a senior White House aide played a central role in preparing former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice for her controversial Sunday show appearances — where she wrongly blamed protests over an Internet video.
More than 100 pages of documents were released to the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. Among them was a Sept. 14, 2012, email from Ben Rhodes, an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications.
The Rhodes email, with the subject line: “RE: PREP Call with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET,” was sent to a dozen members of the administration’s inner circle, including key members of the White House communications team such as Press Secretary Jay Carney.
In the email, Rhodes specifically draws attention to the anti-Islam Internet video, without distinguishing whether the Benghazi attack was different from protests elsewhere.
The email lists the following two goals, among others:
“To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.”
“To reinforce the President and Administration’s strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.”
The email goes on to state that the U.S. government rejected the message of the Internet video. “We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence,” the email stated.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the documents read like a PR strategy, not an effort to provide the best available intelligence to the American people.
“The goal of the White House was to do one thing primarily, which was to make the president look good. Blame it on the video and not [the] president’s policies,” he said.
The Rhodes email was not part of the 100 pages of emails released by the administration last May — after Republicans refused to move forward with the confirmation of John Brennan as CIA director until the so-called “talking points” emails were made public.
The email is also significant because in congressional testimony in early April, former deputy CIA director Michael Morell told lawmakers it was Rice, in her Sunday show appearances, who linked the video to the Benghazi attack. Morell said the video was not part of the CIA analysis.
Read More
- See more at:

Why a muslim First Responder...I think we know why...grrrrrrr....

Muslim 9/11 First Responder gets New York City street named after him

/ Jihad Watch
Salman Hamdani StreetWhy Hamdani in particular? There were many First Responders, and many police cadets who were killed in 9/11. Might this street renaming have something to do with pandering to Muslims who have professed outrage for so many years over recently discontinued NYPD counter-terror efforts in Muslim communities?

“Muslim 9/11 First Responder Gets New York City Street Named After Him,” by Pamela Geller, Breitbart, April 28, 2014:
The New York Daily News reported Monday that “a police cadet who died helping World Trade Center victims on 9/11 was honored Monday at a Queens street renaming — 13 years after being accused of involvement in the attacks. Residents and elected officials came together to formally rename 204th St. at 35th Ave. ‘Salman Hamdani Way’ after Mohammed Salman Hamdani, the son of Muslim immigrants from Pakistan who lived a block from the Bayside street.”
Endless concessions and accommodations to Islamic demands only give way to more. Not to rain on anyone’s proselytizing parade, but why this guy? Why does this first responder get a street named after him? Because he’s a Muslim? What about the other hundreds of first responders who died that day? Why don’t they have streets named after them?
Is it because Mohammed Salman Hamdani is a unicorn? Is it really so extraordinary that a Muslim helped people that he gets singled out? Why is his sacrifice greater than that of all the other first responders who were killed?
Apparently New York City thinks so. And so does the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). In their press release about the street renaming, they managed both to crow and to play the victim card. The Board President of CAIR’s New York chapter, Ryan Mahoney (either a convert to Islam or a useful idiot for this Hamas group), said: “Today, CAIR-NY commends the city council for honoring a true American hero, Salman Hamdani, who gave his life as a first responder on 9/11. This street naming will serve as a reminder of courage and sacrifice to the residents and visitors of Bayside for years to come as well as a testament that individuals and communities of all ethnic and religious backgrounds are united in the cause of service to humanity.”
That wasn’t so bad, but then CAIR went on to whine: “In 2012, Hamdani was not included in the list of fallen police officers in the NYPD’s official 9/11 memorial and in the list of 441 first responders on the National September 11 Memorial.”
CAIR doesn’t mention the fact that, as journalist Matthew Shaffer states, “six weeks after the September 11 attacks — before Hamdani’s remains were identified, which Ellison implies to be the turning point of public perception — Congress signed the PATRIOT Act into law with this line included: ‘Many Arab Americans and Muslim Americans have acted heroically during the attacks on the United States, including Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a 23-year-old New Yorker of Pakistani descent, who is believed to have gone to the World Trade Center to offer rescue assistance and is now missing.’ That is, Hamdani was actually singled out for particular high honors among the thousands of victims of the September 11 attacks.”
It is odd that CAIR didn’t repeat the Daily News’s victimhood claim that Hamdani was “accused of involvement in the attacks” by anonymous police sources cited in early news reports. Muslim Representative Keith Ellison made a travesty of Rep. Peter King’s counter-terror hearings in 2011 by bursting into crocodile tears while telling the story of how Hamdani was accused of being one of the jihad attackers when he was missing in the days after 9/11, when actually he had been killed helping people at the scene.
But maybe that was too much even for CAIR, since it is so far from the truth. Says Shaffer: “There’s little evidence of the ‘rumors’ of which Ellison speaks, either. Poke around yourself. Go to Google and search for Mohammed Salman Hamdani’s name, using various time frames from before today’s hearings (say, in the week after the September 11 attack). You’ll discover two discordant sets of returns: none for sites and news reports accusing Hamdani of being a terrorist, and many thousands of pages honoring him as a hero while claiming that he was ‘widely accused’ of being a terrorist.”
How many people did Salman Hamdani save? He responded to an emergency. That was his job. Just like the other 2993 victims who went to work that day. They deserve streets named after them, too.

Benghazi emails show White House effort to protect Obama

/ Jihad Watch
ObamadownturnThe most disturbing aspect of this whole episode, aside from the murders of Ambassador Stevens and the others, was the fact that the Obama White House decided to blame the Internet video for the attack, thus making an indirect assault on the freedom of speech and a sidelong endorsement of Sharia blasphemy restrictions.

“Benghazi Emails Show White House Effort to Protect Obama,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, April 29, 2014:
Previously unreleased internal Obama administration emails show that a coordinated effort was made in the days following the Benghazi terror attacks to portray the incident as “rooted in [an] Internet video, and not [in] a broader failure or policy.”
Emails sent by senior White House adviser Ben Rhodes to other top administration officials reveal an effort to insulate President Barack Obama from the attacks that killed four Americans.
Rhodes sent this email to top White House officials such as David Plouffe and Jay Carney just a day before National Security Adviser Susan Rice made her infamous Sunday news show appearances to discuss the attack.
The “goal,” according to these emails, was “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy.”
Rice came under fierce criticism following her appearances on television after she adhered to these talking points and blamed the attack on a little-watched Internet video.
The newly released internal White House e-mails show that Rice’s orders came from top Obama administration communications officials.
“[W]e’ve made our views on this video crystal clear. The United States government had nothing to do with it,” Rhodes wrote in the email, which was released on Tuesday by the advocacy group Judicial Watch.
“We reject its message and its contents,” he wrote. “We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence. And we are working to make sure that people around the globe hear that message.”
Rhodes also suggested that Rice tout Obama’s reputation as “steady and statesmanlike.”
“I think that people have come to trust that President Obama provides leadership that is steady and statesmanlike,” he wrote. “There are always going to be challenges that emerge around the world, and time and again, he has shown that we can meet them.”
Also contained in the 41 pages of documents obtained by Judicial Watch is a Sep. 12, 2012 email from Payton Knopf, the former deputy spokesman at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations.
In this communication, Knopf informs Rice that senior officials had already dubbed the Benghazi attack as “complex” and planned in advance. Despite this information, Rice still insisted that attacks were “spontaneous.”
The newly released cache of emails also appear to confirm that the CIA altered its original talking points on the attacks in the following days.
Then-CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell is identified as the person who heavily edited the critical fact sheet.
“The first draft apparently seemed unsuitable … because they seemed to encourage the reader to infer incorrectly that the CIA had warned about a specific attack on our embassy,” states one email. “Morell noted that these points were not good and he had taken a heavy hand to editing them. He noted that he would be happy to work with [then deputy chief of staff to Hillary Clinton] Jake Sullivan and Rhodes to develop appropriate talking points.”…
Divert and deflect honed to a fine art  
By: Diane Sori 
"The crime of apartheid is defined as inhumane acts committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”
- 1998 Rome Statute (the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC)

Yesterday, 80-year old Donald Sterling...tried in the court of public opinion...was banned for life from any and all NBA league activities, fined $2.5 million for racist statements made, and will be forced to sell 'The Clippers' all because of comments he made in a PRIVATE taped phone conversation with his then bought and paid for 30-year old mistress. This punishment came after threats by ubber race-baiter Al Sharpton to protest at the NBA headquarters. And while Sterling's statements were disgusting and indeed racist saying them is NO crime as he is protected by the First Amendment for NO violence against the government or against anyone was made in his comments...brief to the point synopsis NOTHING more needs to be said.

Divert and while the media stays focused on and is promoting this story ad-nauseum, real stories about real serious international infractions basically go unreported, and that is what Obama hoped for as the stories going unreported give yet another black-eye to his administration.
"If there’s no two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict soon, Israel risks becoming 'an apartheid state,'” hateful words said by Secretary of State John 'Swiftboat' Kerry as he addressed world leaders in a closed-door meeting last Friday at the Trilateral Commission.  
John Kerry...just his name becomes synonymous with the word 'traitor' NOT just for his LIES about his service in Viet Nam and for his to this day close-friendship with 'Hanoi' Jane Fonda, but now for his out-and-out bigoted and hateful words deliberately and maliciously said about our ally Israel on the eve of Yom Hashoah... Holocaust Memorial Day...the day set aside every year to remember and honor the six million Jews...six million men, women, and children...MURDERED by Adolf Hitler and his cronies just for being Jews.

And what's even sadder than the words themselves is that Kerry ignores the fact that there is NO semblance of apartheid in Israel whatsoever as all with Israeli citizenship...and the Palestinians refuse Israeli citizenship...whether Jews, muslims or Christians, have the same equal rights and standing under Israeli law. Can't say that in any Arab any muslim country. In fact, the PLO has announced that in any future Palestinian state, Jews will NOT be permitted to be residents... now that is apartheid Mr. Kerry...that is apartheid.
And these words about apartheid were NOT the only anti-Israel comments that Kerry made while speaking before the commission. This in-your-face hater of Israel actually threatened that failure of the Israeli/Palestinian peace talks could lead to a restart of Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens. This truly vile man looks away to the fact that violence against Israeli citizens has NEVER stopped courtesy of all the rockets lobbed into Israel from his ever-loving Palestinian cohorts in Gaza.  
Kerry also alluded to the fact that if one or both of the governments of either Benjamin Netanyahu or that of Mahmoud Abbas left power, there could be a change for the positive in the prospects for peace. If “there is a change of government or a change of heart,” Kerry said, “something will happen.” The man who works for and is loyal to the most corrupt and traitorous government in U.S. history had the audacity to criticize the governments of others, especially the government of our closest ally and friend, Israel.

And with Jewish leaders rightly seething over Kerry's words, TexasSenator Ted Cruz did the right thing by calling for Kerry's resignation. Saying, “Mr. President, it is my belief that Secretary Kerry has thus proven himself unsuitable for his position and that before any further harm is done to our alliance with Israel, he should offer President Obama his resignation,” adding, “And the president should accept it.” Cruz said what needed to be said...but something we know Kerry's fellow Israel-hater Barack HUSSEIN Obama will NEVER do.

And now 'Mr. Swiftboat', in an attempt to cover his butt, has said he chose the wrong words in describing Israel's possible future. Wrong words my eye...Kerry knew damn well what he was saying as his previous comments concerning Israel speak volumes about his true feelings for the now and forever Jewish state. Releasing a statement through the State Department, Kerry turned his ire on Republicans by saying these attacks against him were NOTHING but "partisan political" attacks. "I will not allow my commitment to Israel to be questioned by anyone, particularly for partisan, political purposes..." he said in his statement but NO one is buying this nonsense for Kerry is NOT committed to Israel but to the muslim brethren of his boss Barack HUSSEIN Obama...for a traitor doesn't change his spots that easily...for the first words out of someone's mouth are more times than NOT the words they meant to say.

In his continued attempts to remove his foot from his mouth, Kerry claimed his words were only an "expression" and "misinterpretation" of his deep belief that a two-state solution is the only viable way to end the on-going conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. But let's be honest here...there is NO "misinterpretation" of words for these words are NOT unlike his past public pronouncements regarding his military record, which he claims to this day to have also been"misinterpreted." A liar like his boss is more like it...a man whose words are always carefully chosen for he, like Obama, is a master of subterfuge and lies...a master at blame everybody else for his actions when caught.

And always remember that there was NEVER any real possibility for Kerry or anyone else for that matter brokering a true peace deal simply because trading land for peace just does NOT work. And the truth is that the Palestinians NEVER really wanted peace as they are of the same islamic mindset that wants Israel pushed into the sea...of the same mindset that says we want it all...and John 'Swiftboat' Kerry was Obama's appointed man to give them just that.

So while Kerry was bloviating his LIES all these many months about wanting a two-state solution that we all knew from the start would NEVER be had what with Kerry on many occasions baiting and publicly chastising Israel...publicly chastising Netanyahu...about the building of settlements on their rightfully owned land...a final deal with Iran had time to be reached allowing them to continue enriching uranium.

And all this was going on while the media had us focused on both the wild goose chase search for a missing plane and the fall of a wizened 80-year old racist. It will now be interesting to see what the media cooks up for us to focus on next, especially with yesterday's bombshell that as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit more than 100 pages of documents were released to Judicial Watch, and that among these documents was a September 14, 2012, e-mail from Ben Rhodes (an assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for strategic communications) showing that one of the Obama administration’s primary communications goals after the September 11th attack on Benghazi was “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy."

But that story my friends is for another day.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Sterling has been banned for life from any NBA activity

By: Diane Sori & Craig Andresen...Right Side Patriots

BREAKING NEWS...Donald Sterling has been banned for life from any and all NBA league activity, fined $2.5 million for racist statements made, and will be forced to sell 'The Clippers' all because of taped comments he made in a PRIVATE phone conversation with his then bought and paid for bimbo. This came after threats by ubber race-baiter Al Sharpton threatened to protest at the NBA headquarters.

While Sterling's statements were disgusting and indeed racist saying them is NO crime as he is protected by the First Amendment as NO violence was threatened in his comments. What we want to know is how come the media doesn't remember and report on a similar situation in reverse to compare and contrast the incidents. Remember the broohaha back in 1987 with the Larry Bird/Isiah Thomas reverse racist statements. Oh's NOT remembered because it was only tokenly reported on.

It seems when it's white on black comments (or crime) all hell breaks lose but when its black on white comments (or crime) it's either overlooked or excused. This is why racism continues to exist in America and it's NOT because of racial hated per se but is because the media selectively promotes that hate to cater to the very ones who love to stir the pot of America's once healing racial wounds.

1) It doesn't matter whether you're yelling at someone who never knew you existed five minutes ago, lying about a conservative because you don't agree with him or even throwing a brick through a strore window, you are always the poor, oppressed victim.

2) By default, liberals can't be racist, sexist, or homophobic by virtue of being liberal. In other words, if a socialist like Hitler were around today, not only would he deny he is anti-Semitic, he'd be calling OTHER PEOPLE anti-Semitic.

3) The only bad, wrong and immoral thing you can do is being judgmental enough to label an activity bad, wrong, or immoral. That makes you sound like Rick Santorum and even if you turn out to be right about a lot of things over the long term, is it worth it if you sound like Rick Santorum?

4) Women, blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, gays, Jews, Asians -- pretty much everyone but straight white males -- are weak, hapless, sad victims who are barely capable of tying their own shoes without a liberal writing a government policy that does it for them.

5) There is no such thing as the failure of a liberal policy; there are only well meaning left-wingers doing wonderful things. If they don't turn out as expected, there must be evil, awful conservative Republicans causing it somehow -- probably George W. Bush or alternately, if he's busy planning new wars, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Ted Cruz or Sarah Palin.

6) Liberalism is a jealous god and it will not tolerate anything, especially Christianity, being put before it. If Jesus wants to be a significant part of your life, He better call for gay marriage and a carbon tax first.

7) It's better to bankrupt a city like Detroit, cause the deaths of millions in Africa by banning DDT, or destroy the American health care system with Obamacare than to be called "mean" for choosing policies based on whether they work or not.

8) Not only should you go ahead and covet your neighbor's possessions, you should encourage other people to do it, too. Then, you should call for the government to take their possessions and redistribute them. After they get done, there may not be much of anything left, but then you'll all be equally poor and miserable and there's a lot to be said for that.

9) Disagreeing with a black Democrat? Racist. Opposing Affirmative Action? Racist. Think we pay out too much in welfare and food stamps? Racist. Don't like the IRS? Racist. Republican? Racist. Wait, what are we talking about? Racist!

10) Money is no object -- taxpayer money, of course, not your own. Your money, you want to keep. But, when other people's money is on the line, it's worth spending any amount, no matter how large, to achieve any good, no matter how small.
Of all the cynical frauds of the Obama administration, few are so despicable as sacrificing the education of poor and minority children to the interests of the teachers' unions.

Attorney General Eric Holder's attempt to suppress the spread of charter schools in Louisiana was just one of the signs of that cynicism. His nationwide threats of legal action against schools that discipline more black students than he thinks they should are at least as damaging.

Charter schools are hated by teachers' unions and by much of the educational establishment in general. They seem to be especially hated when they succeed in educating minority children whom the educational establishment says cannot be educated.

Apparently it can be done when you don't have to hire unionized teachers with iron-clad tenure, and when you don't have to follow the dogmas in vogue in the educational establishment.

Last year, there was an attempt to shut down the American Indian Model Schools in Oakland, California -- schools that had been ranked among the top schools in the nation, schools with the top test scores in their district and the fourth highest scores in the entire state of California.

The reason given was that the former -- repeat, FORMER -- head of these schools was accused of financial irregularities. Since there are courts of law to determine the guilt or innocence of individuals, why should school children be punished by having their schools shut down, immediately and permanently, before any court even held a trial?

Fortunately, a court order prevented this planned vindictive closing of this highly successful charter school with minority students. But the attempt shows the animus and the cynical disregard of the education of children who have few other places to get a comparable education.

Attorney General Holder's threats of legal action against schools where minority students are disciplined more often than he wants are a much more sweeping and damaging blow to the education of poor and minority students across the country.

Among the biggest obstacles to educating children in many ghetto schools are disruptive students whose antics, threats and violence can make education virtually impossible. If only 10 percent of the students are this way, that sacrifices the education of the other 90 percent.

The idea that Eric Holder, or anybody else, can sit in Washington and determine how many disciplinary actions against individual students are warranted or unwarranted in schools across the length and breadth of this country would be laughable if it were not so tragic.

Relying on racial statistics tells you nothing, unless you believe that black male students cannot possibly be more disruptive than Asian female students, or that students in crime-ridden neighborhoods cannot possibly require disciplinary actions more often than children in the most staid, middle-class neighborhoods.

Attorney General Holder is not fool enough to believe either of those things. Why then is he pursuing this numbers game?

The most obvious answer is politics. Anything that promotes a sense of grievance from charges of racial discrimination offers hope of energizing the black vote to turn out to vote for Democrats, which is especially needed when support from other voters is weakening in the wake of Obama administration scandals and fiascoes.

Eric Holder's other big racial crusade, against requiring identification for voting, is the same political game. And it is carried out with the same cynical promotion of fears, with orchestrated hysteria from other Democrats -- as if having to show identification to vote is like a revival of the Ku Klux Klan.

Blacks, whites and everybody else can be asked for identification these days, whether cashing a check or using a credit card at a local store or going to an airport -- or even getting into some political meetings called to protest voter ID laws.

But to sacrifice the education of children, especially children for whom education may be their only ticket out of poverty, is truly a new low. As someone once said to Senator Joe McCarthy, "Have you no sense of decency, sir?"

Robert Spencer in PJ Lifestyle: 5 Truths the 9/11 Museum Should Tell About 9/11

/ Jihad Watch
911MemorialIn PJ Lifestyle this week I recall five basic truths that everyone, especially the directors of the 9/11 Museum, should know about 9/11. Most people, however, probably don’t know these things — and for that we have the mainstream media to thank.
A controversy erupted last week at the National September 11 Memorial Museum over exactly how the museum should depict what happened on that fateful day. So it’s time to give them a few unsolicited suggestions.
The New York Times reported that Muslim leaders in New York are angry about a film that is slated to be shown at the museum titled The Rise of Al Qaeda because it “refers to the terrorists as Islamists who viewed their mission as a jihad.” Sheikh Mostafa Elazabawy, the imam of Masjid Manhattan, wrote to the museum’s director: “The screening of this film in its present state would greatly offend our local Muslim believers as well as any foreign Muslim visitor to the museum.”
Wait – aren’t the “local Muslim believers,” as well as any given “foreign Muslim visitor,” supposed to be part of the vast majority of Muslims worldwide who abhor and reject al Qaeda? So why would a film about al Qaeda offend them? Because, Elazabawy explains, “unsophisticated visitors who do not understand the difference between Al Qaeda and Muslims may come away with a prejudiced view of Islam, leading to antagonism and even confrontation toward Muslim believers near the site.”
Akbar Ahmed, a professor at American University and a renowned and respected moderate Muslim, complained that people who see the film are “simply going to say Islamist means Muslims, jihadist means Muslims.” While he acknowledged that “the terrorists need to be condemned and remembered for what they did,” he warned that “when you associate their religion with what they did, then you are automatically including, by association, one and a half billion people who had nothing to do with these actions and who ultimately the U.S. would not want to unnecessarily alienate.”
But this is a sleight-of-hand: it is not the 9/11 Museum that is associating their religion with what they did. It was the 9/11 hijackers themselves who associated their religion with what they did. Elazabawy and Ahmed want the museum to ignore and whitewash that fact, and it will almost certainly comply: it has already begun to do so by removing mention of “Islamic terrorism” from its website.
In a just world, however, it would highlight these five truths:
5. The 9/11 hijackers were Islamic jihadists acting in accord with Islamic imperatives.

Kerry: “Resign!” 
Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

It is good to see the blistering backlash to Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry’s vicious antisemitic libel. Both sides of aisle are calling for this antisemite’s resignation.

The Obama regime thinks if the enemedia advances their pro-jihad agenda that what  we the little people, the American people,  think is irrelevant. How very wrong they are. And how very clearly they will see that in the weeks and months ahead.  Delusional royalty.

O’s chickens are coming home to roost, if I may crib form his poisonous mentor, Jeremiah Wright.
Hill Republicans call on Kerry to apologize, resign for reported Israel ‘apartheid’ remarks, Published April 28, 2014,
A firestorm broke out among congressional Republicans Monday over Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly saying Israel could become an “apartheid state,” with the No. 2 House leader saying he should apologize and a senator calling on him to resign.

“Reports that Secretary Kerry has suggested Israel is becoming an apartheid state are extremely disappointing,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, who is Jewish, said in a statement. “The use of the word apartheid has routinely been dismissed as both offensive and inaccurate, and Secretary Kerry’s use of it makes peace even harder to achieve.”

The Virginia congressman also urged Kerry to “apologize to the Israeli government and people.”

In a statement Monday night, Kerry defended himself, saying, “I will not allow my commitment to Israel to be questioned by anyone, particularly for partisan, political purposes, so I want to be crystal clear about what I believe and what I don’t believe.
“First, Israel is a vibrant democracy and I do not believe, nor have I ever stated, publicly or privately, that Israel is an apartheid state or that it intends to become one.  Anyone who knows anything about me knows that without a shred of doubt.
“Second, I have been around long enough to also know the power of words to create a misimpression, even when unintentional, and if I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word to describe my firm belief that the only way in the long term to have a Jewish state and two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two state solution.”

Late Monday Sen. Barbara Boxer added a bipartisan note to the Kerry criticism, tweeting, “Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and any linkage between Israel and apartheid is nonsensical and ridiculous.”

At the same time, Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, issued a statement saying, “I am disappointed with Secretary Kerry’s reported remarks…(he) knows as well as anyone that negotiating lasting peace in this region of the world is difficult but it’s not productive to express his frustration in this way.”

The backlash follows a Daily Beast report claiming Kerry made the statement during a closed-door meeting Friday with “influential world leaders.” He reportedly warned that if Israel doesn’t make peace, the country could become “an apartheid state.”

Shortly after Cantor’s call for an apology, Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz called for Kerry’s resignation on the Senate floor.

“Mr. President, it is my belief that Secretary Kerry has thus proven himself unsuitable for his position and that before any further harm is done to our alliance with Israel, he should offer President Obama his resignation,” Cruz said. “And the president should accept it.”

Kerry reportedly made the comparison after peace talks hit a wall last week, as Fatah announced a unity agreement with Hamas. Israel, which like the U.S. considers Hamas a terror group, suspended peace talks after that announcement — although Kerry continued to voice hope that both sides could return to the negotiating table.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also slammed Kerry over the reported remarks, made ahead of Holocaust Remembrance Day.

“These comments are outrageous and disappointing,” he said in a statement. “Incendiary name calling does not change the fundamental fact that Israel does not currently have a viable partner for peace. I urge Secretary Kerry and the administration to focus on pressing challenges in the Middle East such as ending the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria and preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon instead of pressuring Israel to make additional concessions to partners who have now chosen to align themselves with a terrorist group.”

The State Department is not denying that Kerry made the remarks. Spokeswoman Jen Psaki, asked about them at Monday’s briefing, said she would not confirm comments made during a private meeting.

While not confirming whether Kerry warned that Israel could become an apartheid state, she said: “The secretary does not believe and did not state publicly or privately that Israel is an apartheid state, and there’s an important difference there.”

“Israel is obviously a vibrant democracy with equal rights for all of its citizens,” she said, reiterating that Kerry believes a “two-state solution is the only way to have two nations and two people living side-by-side in peace and security.”

The post Kerry: “Resign!” appeared first on Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs.

FLORIDA SENATE approves anti-sharia bill!


Bare Naked Islam 


Florida Senate votes 24 to 14 to approve American Laws for American Courts legislation.  

Vote by Full House on HB 903 is pending.

Thank you BNI Readers and for all your emails to the Senators supporting passage of the bill.


The Florida Senate has approved American Laws for American Courts legislation which would prohibit Sharia and other foreign laws.  The full senate voted voted 24 to 14 in favor of SB 386 titled Application of Foreign Law in Certain Cases at the third reading during the Monday, April 28, 2014 session.


This legislation, commonly known as American Laws for American Courts”, would prohibit Florida courts from considering certain provisions of foreign laws, including Islamic Sharia law, if such provisions are inconsistent with the Florida and United States of America Constitutions.


If Florida courts accept provisions of Islamic Sharia law or other foreign laws or legal codes which are inconsistent with American laws it will undermine public policies enacted by our representative form of government and change our value system.


Here’s how they voted (totally on party lines):


Joseph Abruzzo  No Democrat 
Thad Altman  Yes Republican 
Aaron Bean  Yes Republican 
Lizbeth Benacquisto  Yes Republican 
Rob Bradley  Yes Republican 
Jeff Brandes  Yes Republican 
Oscar , II Braynon  No Democrat 
Dwight Bullard  No Democrat 
Jeff Clemens  No Democrat 
Charles S. Dean Sr. Yes Republican 
Nancy C. Detert  Yes Republican 
Miguel Diaz de la Portilla  Yes Republican 
Greg Evers  Yes Republican 
Anitere Flores  Yes Republican 
Don Gaetz  Yes Republican 
Bill Galvano  Yes Republican 
Rene Garcia  Yes Republican 
Andy Gardiner  Yes Republican 
Audrey Gibson  No Democrat 
Denise Grimsley  Yes Republican 
Alan Hays  Yes Republican 
Dorothy L. Hukill  Yes Republican 
Arthenia L. Joyner  No Democrat 
Jack Latvala 
Tom Lee  Yes Republican 
John Legg  Yes Republican 
Gwen Margolis  No Democrat 
Bill Montford  No Democrat 
Joe Negron 
Garrett Richter  Yes Republican 
Jeremy Ring  No Democrat 
Maria Lorts Sachs  No Democrat 
David Simmons  Yes Republican 
Wilton Simpson  Yes Republican 
Christopher L. Smith  No Democrat 
Eleanor Sobel  No Democrat 
Darren Soto  No Democrat 
Kelli Stargel  Yes Republican 
Geraldine F. Thompson  No Democrat 
John Thrasher  Yes Republican

A few questions of 'so when'... 
By: Diane Sori 
So many questions that need many answers that will probably NEVER be gotten...

So when is Sean Hannity (and now Mike Huckabee as well) going to apologize to Cliven Bundy for the nasty things he said about the very man standing strong against a federal government run amok. Calling him a racist and such Hannity...of all people...listened to the New York Times edited version of Bundy's 'supposed' racist remarks instead of listening to the entire unedited interview. And with this liberal rag of a newspaper doing what Hannity should have known they'd in editing, splicing, and pasting together Bundy's words to fit their leftist agenda...the saddest thing of all is that Sean Hannity fell for it. Shame on him but now he needs to make amends and do so by putting on his big boy pants, man-up by eating some crow, and apologize 'ON-AIR' to Cliven Bundy for listening to and accepting as facts the words of the likes of The New York closed.

So when are those here in our country who think there's a Republican 'War on Women' going to wake up and realize that it's the left...the Democrats as in Obama and crew...who NOT only are the ones perpetrating the LIE about a 'War on Women' here at home but who actually condone the inequality women face in many parts of the world. Condone it for NO objection was raised by our American delegation to the U(seless) N(ations)...on Obama's orders perhaps...when Iran was unanimously elected to the U.N.’s Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), a commission dealing on a global level with gender equality and the advancement of women. So now Iran again sits on this all-important commission with nary an objection by any delegation even knowing their dismal record on women's issues...doing NOTHING even when given the opportunity to speak-up against this appointment.

Iran, the country where the hijab is mandatory dress for all woman venturing out into the streets and public places...Iran, the country where divorce is a husband’s right but where a woman must prove her husband has either abandoned her, is mentally ill, abusive, or a drug addict, for her to get a divorce...Iran, the country where child custody, inheritance, and ownership laws side overwhelmingly with the man...Iran, the country where women are NOT allowed to be judges or hold high-ranking positions in the government...Iran, the country where honor killings are the acceptable norm and adultery is a crime that holds the woman accountable for the very evidence that will be used against her, and where her testimony is worth half that of a man’s...that very country will continue to sit on a commission dealing with women's rights and equality. But hey...this goes hand-in-hand with Obama's pandering and acquiescing to his islamic brethren by his allowing Iran to pull the wool over the world's eyes concerning the issue of their becoming an anything but peaceful nuclear power.

So when are the leaders of the G7 nations...the leaders of the now anything but 'free world'...going to accept the fact that their mere condemnation of Putin's actions in and around Ukraine...actions that could escalate into a larger conflict that could devour the entire region...and their slapping of even more useless albeit targeted sanctions on Russia all while Russia counters them by raising interest rates for a second consecutive month in an effort to limit the economic damage caused by these very sanctions...will amount to absolutely NOTHING against a man hell-bent on rebuilding the Russian Empire.

When will they realize that imposing sanctions of any sort instead of sending a strong united military show of force to the area...and the token 600 troops Obama is sending to the area is NO show of force...will NOT get the 'Russian Bear' to pull back his troops. When will these leaders realize that Vladimir Putin is the winner of this game as he orders new military drills near the border with eastern Ukraine and as Russian aircraft enter Ukrainian airspace, doing so as he sits back and laughs over how far down the path to humiliation and defeat his American counterpart, Barack HUSSEIN Obama, has led our beloved far down this path he, Vladimir Putin, has manipulated and played the president of the world's last remaining superpower.

So when will Barack HUSSEIN Obama stop beholding our country to his muslim brethren in regards to keeping us dependent on Arab oil. When will he approve the building of the Keystone XL Pipeline that would put thousands of Americans back to work and help them get off the government welfare rolls and us away from OPEC oil price manipulation. When...probably NEVER...NOT even after the November mid-term elections for to do so would take away people's allegiance to the party that feeds them and would raise the ire of those this miserable excuse of a president caters, panders, and bows down to.

So when will this administration finally get it that the once-called 'Roadmap to Peace'...the now 'anything but peace talks' between the Israelis and the over and that it NEVER had a chance to succeed for trading land for peace will NOT now or ever work when those who want the land want ALL of the land. And when the talks involve a two-faced desert rat like Mahmoud Abbas, a man who would rather make deals to form a 'unity government' with Hamas terrorists who "will not give any cover for any negotiations with the enemy" than make peace with Israel, you just know the time has come to pack your bags and go home. That is go home and let Israel do what Israel needs to do to ensure its survival now and forever.

So when will Hillary 'What Does It Matter' Clinton finally accept the fact that we patriots will NOT ever allow her to forget her role in the murders of four Americans at Benghazi. And she knows we know what she is so trying to hide and that it will haunt her every move if she dares choose to run for president in 2016. So when will we finally get to the bottom of why the feds really want Clive Bundy and his cows off 'public' lands...and when...and I want a date for this one...when can we finally get rid of the monstrosity know as ObamaCare.

So again, so many questions that need many answers that will only be gotten when hell freezes over or when some brave soul decides to put America first and sings like the proverbial canary...but sadly I will NOT hold my breath for that one.